Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Pause vs power cycle break-even point - 83.5 seconds
Re: Pause vs power cycle break-even point - 83.5 seconds
From: Chris Holt <amiga2k_at_cox.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 22:41:10 -0400
I doubt it's seriously wear inducing. Since the drive is capable of
"spinning down" and there is a setting to decide when it should, it stands
to reason that spinning down and spinning up again is not considered a
really bad thing. Remember these drives were designed for notebooks with
all their power saving features. Notebooks are constantly spinning the
drive down and back up again for power saving when idle and when suspend
function is used.
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 19:19:25 -0700, Sharon wrote:
> Well, that was doggone scientific and clear! So the pause is less power
> consuming for 1.5 minutes or less, but for my 5- and 10-minute breaks
> turning it off is better.
> Is there any more or less "wear" on the unit itself caused by turning
> it off and on once each hour? The work I do requires us to work fast
> and hard, so for ergonomic reasons we get a 5-minute break one hour and
> then a 10-minute break the next hour, which is why I asked this
> question originally. For battery conservation, turning it off is
> better. How about for hard drive life extension? Is that a factor at
> all? It's cheaper to buy more batteries than to replace the Jukebox!
> Sure are a lot of very smart people on this board....thankfully for me!
Received on 2003-08-22